Tuesday, August 16, 2011 66 Comments

Choose empire

For Caesar the Sibyl had two words.
"Choose empire," she said. And explained:
"The republic has failed." No, really?
Why golly, what whatsoever would ever
Make anyone say that? Or, what's worse,
Abstract so seditious a converse?
Caesar was a man of few words,
Not in any way a dimwit. What,
Was he wrong? And Cicero right?
Octavian lived and Cicero died;
Octavian might die, Cicero live,
Him and time restore a real Senate,
Rome republican as snow, that cast
Out kings and never whined them back,
Abhorring to its last scheduled meeting
The seducing sins of monarchy -
To the Antonine age, and beyond? Ha!
As any fool once knew, that second Rome
(Bigger, if not greater, than Numa's hill),
Died not by murder but of cancer.
Brick? Marble? Euphemisms here.
Augustus found Rome graffiti, sumac,
Bandits, drones, and professional liars.
A Rome of zombies! A zombie republic,
That the Caesars burned, and in whose ash
Was found: Rome. What Augustus did:
He slew the zombies. He saved the world.
Time indeed might well have preserved
A zombie Senate. The Quadi would not.
What has time to say to the Quadi?
The Quadi, men, not zombies like us,
Wield metal bars, ugly but effective.
A zombie has no chance with the Quadi.
They take our heads. They cart off
Our women. They must have some
Special or Quadi time of their own.
Surely our story is not their own,
Terrible and now just beginning.
Indeed the real mystery of the fall
Is that as Rome fell soft, all around
Her enemies weakened too - the Vandals
Being mere pussies, next to the Quadi.
And weakness is blood, terror, death:
The boy to be Gildas is already born.
Did "Rome die laughing"? Absolutely -
Though by then, others laughed too.
Choose empire! We can say one thing
For our old republic: where Cicero
Chose wrong, Sidonius had not the
Choice. The Sibyl grants it just once.

66 Comments:

Anonymous josh said...

Poetry = off topic discussion thread.

Did you guys know about this:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=cjBQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=Gw0EAAAAIBAJ&pg=6710,1813644&dq=huxley+japan&hl=en

wtf?

August 16, 2011 at 5:47 PM  
Blogger Avery said...

josh: Wikipedia has it, yes?

Did you know about this?

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,951294,00.html

August 16, 2011 at 5:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is quite a coincidence that Huxley was said to disappear on December 6, the day before Pearl Harbor.

August 16, 2011 at 6:32 PM  
Blogger Cyprian Korzeniowski said...

MM ~ Perhaps you should publish a book of your own verse as a stealthy, honey coated introduction to your ideas. Lucretius was not above the tactic.

August 16, 2011 at 8:09 PM  
Blogger James A. Donald said...

The Roman Republic was a dead man walking once Gracchus touched the Tribune, yet it seemed to survive, so everyone believed, for hundred years afterwards.

August 16, 2011 at 9:33 PM  
Blogger Alrenous said...

Didn't the Roman Empire have PR issues? Didn't it try to pass itself off as a republic but failed to do so within a couple decades?

You gotta hand it to 'democracy' for keeping the blinds up for way, way longer, especially against our much greater epistemic and communication technologies.

August 17, 2011 at 7:29 AM  
Anonymous Ron Potato said...

Modern technologies keep up the blinds of 'democracy': the hypnosis of television, the satiating pleasures of other technology, the excess wealth which enables universal state education, the appearance of intelligence in social scientists by association with the successes of physics and mathematics, the overwhelming force owned by the state from wealth and advanced weaponry, etc.

August 17, 2011 at 10:48 AM  
Anonymous josh said...

the isolation and transience of housing market segmentation.

August 17, 2011 at 2:24 PM  
Anonymous josh said...

google has pulled its news archive database. will the sith library be next?

August 17, 2011 at 4:03 PM  
Blogger death maiden said...

this is absolutely ass-backwards. the senate represented the old aristocracy -- as typified by sulla and cato minor. cicero -- novus homo -- could be considered a proto-disraeli.

the caesars were old aristocracy as well: the fall of republic was a political squabble among oligarchs. but behind it stood the real import: the first appearance of the total, universal state

being against "progress" and yet lauding augustus is, uh, madness

August 17, 2011 at 6:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonandon said...

H. G. Wells called Huxley "The Mad Matter of the Scientific World" if I recall correctly. He was a very interesting character, and certainly the very embodiment of a true member of The Cathedral.

August 18, 2011 at 1:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonandon said...

I have mistaken the M key for the H key. Hatter, of course. My apologies.

August 18, 2011 at 1:56 AM  
Anonymous Rollory said...

The Romans continued to refer to the "res publica" - the public thing - until the very end. The details of how it was administered changed, but it was still - to them - recognizably the same entity as had been set up when Tarquin was thrown out. The word "republic" did not have the inherent meaning of representative electoral government for them as it does for us.

August 18, 2011 at 7:26 AM  
Anonymous Michael said...

Death Maiden is generally right, but does not go into enough detail.

The Roman Republic was an aristocratic affair from the start. There were what might be called conservative and liberal factions throughout its existence; at the time of M. Tullius Cicero and C. Julius Caesar these were called the Optimates and the Populares. The Populares were led by aristocrats who appealed to the lower classes for their support, and who sought to enlarge the political power of the lower classes, not to benefit them, but to enhance these aristocratic leaders' own political position. The type is familiar: Franklin Roosevelt or Teddy Kennedy are modern parallels.

The word "tyranny" in ancient political thought did not necessarily denote a harsh and bloodthirsty ruler; it meant, rather, an autocrat who had seized power on the basis of popular support. Aristotle set the tyrant in opposition to the monarch, who was an autocrat that had succeeded to power according to law.

The Roman constitution provided for the appointment by the Senate of a dictator in times of emergency. The dictator held greatly concentrated power, but for a limited term and under some other limitations. Julius Caesar was appointed dictator on several occasions, but at the last, caused the Senate to bend the usual limitations and make him effectively dictator in perpetuity.

Julius Caesar had been of the party of the Populares, belonging to a tradition that he inherited from his uncle C. Marius. He promulgated a law distributing public lands to the poor, a typical populist pandering in return for support. He had also been involved to some degree in the conspiracies of L. Sergius Catiline, another member of the Populares. Where Catiline failed, Caesar succeeded. He was, and was seen as being, a would-be tyrant of the Aristotelian type.

This charge is much less easily made against Octavian. By the time Octavian came to power, the Roman republic was in disarray as a result of the civil wars between the various claimants to power. Octavian had begun as Mark Antony's ally in the fight against M. Junius Brutus, but fell out with Antony after the latter's alliance with Cleopatra.

Both Julius Caesar and Octavian/Augustus are archetypes in the Continental European and Latin American political traditions. Julius might well be called the archetypal populist strong man, inspiring such later examples as Mussolini, Peron, and Chavez. Augustus, on the other hand, is the archetype of the caudillo, who intervenes to restore order when civil strife has led to its disintegration. Later examples are Buonaparte, Franco, and Pinochet.

"Romanitas" was a great influence on the politics of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, as it was upon their art and architecture. It's noteworthy that the Roman figure whose example was favored in the young United States was neither Julius nor Augustus Caesar, but the much more ancient Cincinnatus. Why Cincinnatus appealed to our ancestors rather than one or the other of the Caesars would be an interesting study.

August 18, 2011 at 11:32 AM  
Blogger death maiden said...

michael --

but what of the rationality of the marian reforms? political rights had to expand, via the professionalization of the military, in order for rome to win its empire. all the major figures of this period are the strongest generals of this period -- all wealthy enough to field, essentially, their own clientist armies. kind of like proto-corporations, really.

class structure had to be destabilized -- and this is the same mechanism by which athens became democratized as well, through the tyranny of solon.

the ted kennedy analogy certainly doesn't hold, and only would had he been the greatest general of his era, in which case one could indeed envision a five-hundred-year kennedy imperium

August 18, 2011 at 12:03 PM  
Blogger death maiden said...

in addition, the degraded class structure that weakened rome's military, leading to crushing defeats and actual existential threat from the north -- was the direct result of senatorial greed and the runaway expansion of latifundia both through appropriation of soldiers'/small farmers' lands and legalized theft of ager publicus

August 18, 2011 at 12:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You must really like the Romans. They only used one letter case too.

August 18, 2011 at 1:35 PM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

Michael--

It's easy to see why the FF's revered Cincinnatius--he was the "One" who gave up his power--the Roman Frodo, if you will (be a dork, that is).

The FF's imagined (in all their hempy enlightenment haze) that all good men would naturally follow Cinci's lead and not either Caesar.

Of course, they were wrong, and it would have been nice for them to have built a governing system that encouraged the former and prevented the latter.

Most of this would have been done had they simply not had a legislature--or said that the legislature couldn't make any new laws, or something like that.

August 18, 2011 at 1:47 PM  
Anonymous josh said...

Michael,

I tried to do a search on google books for mentions of cicinnatus in the 1700s, but it no longer lets you parameterize the dates. Together with the closing of their newspaper archive, it appears there is something happening here. And what it is ain't exactly obvious.

August 18, 2011 at 4:31 PM  
Anonymous Michael said...

The greatest testimony to the example Cincinnatus provided for the American founders was the establishment of the Society of the Cincinnati, made up of former officers of the Continental Line and their eldest male descendants. The Society still exists. George Washington, Henry Knox, the marquis de Lafayette, John Paul Jones, Alexander Hamilton, James Monroe, the baron von Steuben, and a host of others (including two of my ancestors) were members based upon service. Benjamin Franklin and Gouverneur Morris were honorary members. The city of Cincinnati, Ohio, was named after the Society in 1790.

August 18, 2011 at 8:16 PM  
Blogger Studd Beefpile said...

Rollory> Not just the Romans, but the eastern empire too went to its death swearing up and down it was the republic of the romans.

August 18, 2011 at 8:49 PM  
Blogger Alrenous said...

Alright, new topic, I want to see what agreement is on this.


State and Arlington between them are more or less in charge of the world. They administrate a new-style empire, where the clients nominally retain independence, but run into...difficulties...if the 'international community' disapproves of anything they do.

In fact, State is run by the Ivy League, which is run by Harvard. The president exists more or less as a lightning rod, to draw charges of incompetence away from State, and if State ever got exposed, it would perform the same function for Harvard.
I suspect this keeps going; if Harvard got exposed, it would draw charge away from the actual individuals; say the dean would get blamed, but the dean's just a figurehead.

Politicians come off as incompetent more or less by design. Welfare was never intended to help the poor; voters believe the lies, and so politicians look bad at fulfilling their lies. But also, partly, because pols are a bit incompetent, a bit clueless. Harvard likes them that way; it makes them easier to puppetify and to pull the strings. You can tell Harvard's in the back because pols really are a bit clueless, and smart individuals should be able to manipulate them, but if you try you'll find they're programmed not to listen at all to non-trusted authorities. Therefore, there's a trusted authority in the back, so...yeah, Harvard.

The elite appears out of touch with reality/the common people because there's so many layers of insulation they couldn't care about them if they tried.

Arlington looks so pathetic because they don't have proper intellectual masters. They're puppets without a puppeteer. This is because Harvard likes them this way.


What have I missed?

August 19, 2011 at 9:11 AM  
Anonymous Ron Potato said...

Harvard does not need to directly control anyone in the present.

They need only teach the population, through 12-22 years of schooling, from PhD down to pre-school through layers of Education majors. Your smartest, most successful people are naturally the grade-winners out of the schools and universities, who strongly believe what they were taught, or at least tow the line.

This is why Mencius says the public policy of today, are the professors' ideas from thirty years ago. It does naturally happen that university professors and think-tankers directly control high offices, but even if you replaced every officer of state you would still be faced with a people, civil service, and press who zealously believe the public religion from the Harvard Cathedral. Most of the ideas are the same as their all-American great-grandfathers, or subtle perversions of them.

Likewise, while the Pentagon may have been more independent in the past, the top promoted military officers today do truly believe in democracy, human rights, and strictly avoiding civilian casualties, though they may be a couple decades too conservative for the likes of others.

August 19, 2011 at 11:11 AM  
Anonymous Gabe Ruth said...

True this. I had a couple years outside of US schools growing up, but the worm still got in and though quarantined thanks largely to Steve Sailer and Mr. Moldbug, I still have to consciously defeat it several times a month.

I remember the first time I read Sailer. I felt like my head was spinning for a few days. I recently asked my wife to start reading him, and the last few days have been... interesting. But I don't think it's going to take. Her attitude is basically appeasement, because how much harm can patronizing do, right? And this is why, when I lament womens suffrage, I'm much less than half joking.

August 19, 2011 at 12:50 PM  
Blogger Alrenous said...

If only such foolishness were confined to women. Who is skilled at designing government policy? Specialization of labour; almost nobody. (If anyone, nowadays.)
Moreover, suffrage is far more insidious than merely voting wrong.

August 19, 2011 at 1:28 PM  
Blogger death maiden said...

figure women would like sailer, being that he's a passive-aggressive (reactionary)

August 19, 2011 at 1:50 PM  
Anonymous josh said...

"What have I missed?"

The Foundations.

http://books.google.com/books?id=FQhMAAAAMAAJ&q=turning+of+the+tides&dq=turning+of+the+tides&hl=en
The Foundations successfully took over the Universities and the Executive Dpt. by controlling grants and staffing. Now the exec. dept actually provides more grant funding than the Foundations, but it doesn't much matter because they really are one network. Inner circle types also move freely between the Universities, the Exec. branch and the NGOs.

Also, your set up seems a bit heirarchical. In reality, you can't say Harvard controls the government any more than you can say the government controls Harvard. Ditto, the NGOs and the press and the rest of the Cathedral. If there ever was a small group pulling the strings, there isn't any more. That's a major part of the problem. Various factions within the Cathedral fight and ally for political power, often by destroying and/or corrupting traditional institutions of public influence in their Satanic fashion, while presenting a unified front to the masses.

August 20, 2011 at 3:26 AM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

So the answer is (and has been for a long time, viz. Lincoln) Corporations (though Foundations are more insidious as they are under the radar).

Which is the bit of the hole in MM's "solution"--it depends upon a Corporation.

Perhaps it's possible to make an efficiently ruling corporation, perhaps not--MM's not convinced even himself yet.

August 20, 2011 at 10:20 AM  
Anonymous Alrenous said...

The sovcorp depends on formalization, which depends on legitimacy. A sovcorp working as designed would be just fine, but that requires that its agents and subjects reliably resist illegitimate, informal actions; that therefore informal actors - corrupt officials - can neither hide nor gather allies.

Which is to say MM's materialist amorality is counter-productive.

August 20, 2011 at 12:16 PM  
Anonymous Paul Milenkovic said...

"Your smartest, most successful people are naturally the grade-winners out of the schools and universities, who strongly believe what they were taught, or at least tow the line."

Um, a grade of "D" in a course in Feeds and Animal Feeding. What line is a person supposed to tow to get a satisfactory grade in that course? "Look son, there is this cow over there, and it is mighty hungry because it was just 'freshened' and it is giving milk. You take that hay, from over there, and put it in the trough, over here. And make sure the front end of the cow is facing that here trough."

August 20, 2011 at 6:16 PM  
Anonymous Ron Potato said...

Hard science majors and trade schools teach techniques that immediately interact with the real world. The right answer cannot be fudged; you get no milk, or your bridge collapses. In the humanities, or with some science below chemistry, the subject matter can be detached from reality without obvious physical consequences, and injected with chosen ideology.

Still, in the sciences, the successful student often comes out a believer in soulless materialism, with little philosophy or history beyond the hyper-rationalist track.

So the most dangerous threat in the modern world is neutered, the ones who can make fancy weapons and take over computer systems. They are perhaps the most distracted by hypnotic technology, and the most child-like in being satisfied by solving the problems given to them in their fancy jobs by businessmen and government grants.

They're working on High-Frequency Trading, Social Networking websites, and the last 0.1% of diseases and high-energy particles, and the rest of the science infrastructure in society. But no game-changing inventions.

August 20, 2011 at 7:03 PM  
Blogger James A. Donald said...

It is incorrect to have a simplie hierarchical model of the Cathedral. Harvard is both at the top, and at the bottom, as Stalin was.

Harvard professors depend on grants. They lick the gum off the boots of bureaucrats, to get grants, and perform similar services to journalists at the New York Times.

The Cathedral in action is revealed by the Climategate files and the Challenger inquiry. To launch the shuttle, everyone had to agree that it should be launched, and that it was safe to do so. Unfortunately, numerous engineers knew that the shuttle was going to explode if launched, and knew how and why it would explode. They were not overruled, nor outvoted. Rather, they were subjected to extreme pressure to go along with the "consensus", and if they were the sort of people who could resist such pressure, they never would have had such jobs in the first place.

Similar "consensus" generating pressures are evident in the climategate files.

If you have "consensus", you don't have the sort of hierarchy that an army or a corporation has.

August 20, 2011 at 10:41 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

Moldbug: "Choose empire"

Hamas: "Choose Democracy"

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/liveblog/libya-aug-22-2011-0244

Monday, August 22, 2011 - 00:44 - Libya

Hamas welcomes the revolution freeing Tripoli and congratulates Libyans on the great victory they have achieved, Sami Abu Zuhri, a spokesman for Hamas, said in a short statement to the press on Monday.

Hamas wishes that this victory is a turning point in the history of the Libyan towards freedom and prosperity, Abu Zuhri added.

August 21, 2011 at 5:25 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

Vader: The Libyan rebels are alerted to our presence...

August 21, 2011 at 5:26 PM  
Blogger Alrenous said...

Grant committees are staffed by experts. Other PhDs. Moreover, as a general principle, committees are dominated by individuals.

Similarly, someone has to decide what the consensus will be. They may not even know they have that power, but as a matter of logic, in any conflict over what the consensus will be, someone will win. That person has absolute power in that jurisdiction.

-

Normally guilt by association is a fallacy. Sometimes, such as when overt terrorists groups support something, it isn't. Democracy: supporting the terrorist agenda for 2500 years.

August 22, 2011 at 5:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anyone know what happened to Thursday's blog?

August 22, 2011 at 5:04 AM  
Anonymous RS said...

> as a matter of logic, in any conflict over what the consensus will be, someone will win.

People compromise

August 22, 2011 at 5:57 AM  
Blogger Alrenous said...

Compromise isn't conflict.

August 22, 2011 at 6:01 AM  
Blogger TGGP said...

Some of you guys may not be interested in Karl Smith since he's rather centrist/technocratic, but he's a lot more comfortable with fringe ideas than most of his ilk. The latest is an example: "My gut instinct is that liberalism is not the end. And, in fact in the grand sweep of history it will be an curious oddity. My sense is that the future of sentient life is likely authoritarian, traditionalist and devoid of our values of individualism." Smith is unfortunately a Straussian (not that he shares intellectual descent, but explicitly advocates obfuscation for fear of repercussion) and so doesn't make clear what he is likely referring to.

August 23, 2011 at 6:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"My gut instinct is that liberalism is not the end. And, in fact in the grand sweep of history it will be an curious oddity. My sense is that the future of sentient life is likely authoritarian, traditionalist and devoid of our values of individualism."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2c0yfTKfS8

August 23, 2011 at 9:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The most essential question is not what kind of government we'll have. It's whether or not the socialist/capitalist-driven re-africanization of humanity will be rolled back.

August 24, 2011 at 3:48 AM  
Blogger G. M. Palmer said...

TGGP:

Damn.

Interesting thought, the return to forager status.

That never plays well in Sci-fi. Doesn't seem to be playing too well here, either.

August 24, 2011 at 11:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

…I survived (six years of imprisonment in ghettos, labor camps and concentration camps as a child during World War II)… When, as a nine-year-old, I spent a month in Buchenwald, it never occurred to me that those of my fellow-inmates who were Gypsies, Soviet prisoners of war, or Danish policemen arrested for helping the Jews escape, were undergoing experiences that were different from mine…. Ever since, for over half a century, I have not been able to accept the singling out of this one front, horrible as it may have been, as a unique epoch-making event that requires its own grandiose name, its own capitalized dictionary entry, its own academic discipline called “Holocaust studies.”… But the recent, officially accepted revision of the number of Auschwitz victims from four million to a million or so has made me wonder. One of the precursors of denialism, Paul Rassinier, who died in 1967, asked: “Were Jews murdered?” and answered: “Yes, but not as many as one thinks. Were there any gas chambers? Yes, but not as many as one thinks.” ... For those who believe in ethnic cleansing, the leap from resettlement to massacre is not as great as some of us may think; and if the Nazis were, perhaps, no more evil than the Interahamwe of Uganda, the Bosnian Serb paramilitaries led by Karadžić and Mladić, or the anti-independence militias of East Timor, there is no reason to suppose that they were less so.... Both of my parents survived, and I had no siblings. I have no tattoo (though I sometimes perversely envied those who had them). I was never beaten or starved. After the War I went on with school at the normal grade level. And when I recently visited the Buchenwald memorial site, the foremost thought in my mind – unrepentant cinephile that I am – was to find the location of the barrack where I saw my first movie; never mind that my first screen image was of a smiling Hitler on horseback, introducing a newsreel. The search for the site of the barrack where I actually lived took second place. ... I spent the last months of the War, after Buchenwald, in the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp...

http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/~coby/essays/confden.htm

August 24, 2011 at 1:46 PM  
Anonymous RS said...

Interesting find. The author, alluding to a 'Hans Nolte', almost certainly meant to refer to Ernst Nolte, whom I've mentioned here before.

August 24, 2011 at 4:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"google has pulled its news archive database. will the sith library be next?"

Wiki says the news archive "has been merged with Google News."

August 25, 2011 at 5:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-27/bolivian-sect-members-jailed-for-raping-100-women/2858396

August 26, 2011 at 11:43 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

I just posted this response at Half Sigma's hacienda and I'm also posting it here because I think it explains how the New Deal structure still governs how the modern left operates in the America without having any top->down command and control system.

The American left operates as a Nanny state-Progressive feedback loop which can be described as the "nonprofit sector" where the nonprofit sector's bureaucratic existence is dependent on creating Nanny state bureaucracies that are set up to "solve" unsolvable problems (e.g. racial diversity and global warming) and make the problems worse than they otherwise would be in order to justify their departments existence and bring in grant money.

So, rather than being an aberration from the FDR left, the modern left is the logical result of bureaucratic New Deal government agencies where an unaccountable liberal arts elite can use American citizens as lab rats in order to justify their grants:

August 30, 2011 at 6:11 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

Obviously the order of the most IQ meritocratic businesses from most to least are the ones where their industry is most subject to rapid changes/

The IT industry is the most IQ meritocratic industry because IT corporations are more vulnerable to environmental changes than consulting agencies and consulting agencies are more vulnerable to law.

The field is the least likely to change because their welfare is dependent on changes to government regulations.

And this is why law firms traditionally favor the Democrats. The Democrats are the party of big government regulations and the more regulations government can impose on the the private sector, the more jobs there are for lawyers.

I am beginning to think the divide in America isn't really between value creators and value transferrers, but between the profit sector and the nonprofit sector (nonprofit sector = acedemia, unions, lawyers, liberal think tanks, nonprofit doogooder organizations like "Teach for America", etc) where the profit sector represents the problem solving private sector and the non-profit sector are those industries which rely on, what Moldbug would call, the New Deal Structure of irresponsible government regulatory agencies for their employment.

The nonprofit sector has a vested interest in maintaining their employment by cooking up bogus and destructive solutions to non-existent problems such as the Global Warming industry, the racial diversity industry, the high-carb low fat diet industry which has created the obesity epidemic and then positions itself to reap the revenue of average American's attempts to lose weight on diets that can't work, etc.

If you wonder why white lawyers keep voting for Democrats who pursue anti-white policies like Affirmative Action, just ask yourself how much money the law industry would have gained from discrimination lawsuits ever since Nixon invented AA decades ago.

August 30, 2011 at 6:21 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

Sigma

As I’ve written before, I’ve interviewed in several different fields. In interviewing for computer programming positions, the employers are very interested in testing the job applicant’s programming knowledge. Now, I think this is done in an extremely inefficient manner, but at least the employer is motivated to make an independent determination of how well the job applicants might do their job.

When I interviewed for an entry-level management consulting position, the interview involved giving the job applicant a problem to solve. This problem tested whether the applicant might have learned something in his MBA program (my problem required a knowledge of managerial accounting), and there is a “g” correlated component in that the applicant has to reason out the correct solution or at least a solution which impresses the interviewer, and finally it tests how well the applicant can think in a high-pressure situation. I haven’t worked in management consulting so I can’t say for sure that this is truly the best way to determine how well people might perform as management consultants, but once again, at least the employer is trying to make an independent determination of how well job applicants might do their job.

This has never been the case in any law firm interviews I have been on. It’s really hard to tell what the point is of law firm first interviews. I strongly suspect that the first interview is meaningless, that they just interview a lot of applicants to give the law school placement office the impression that they are willing to consider a lot of their students, and then they invite for second interviews the people with the best resumes, resume quality being mostly a function of whether or not the applicant was on law review and the applicant’s grades.

August 30, 2011 at 6:23 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

Me

http://www.halfsigma.com/2011/08/law-firm-hiring.html

Obviously the order of the most IQ meritocratic businesses from most to least are the ones where their industry is most subject to rapid changes/

The IT industry is the most IQ meritocratic industry because IT corporations are more vulnerable to environmental changes than consulting agencies and consulting agencies are more vulnerable to law.

The field is the least likely to change because their welfare is dependent on changes to government regulations.

And this is why law firms traditionally favor the Democrats. The Democrats are the party of big government regulations and the more regulations government can impose on the the private sector, the more jobs there are for lawyers.

I am beginning to think the divide in America isn't really between value creators and value transferrers, but between the profit sector and the nonprofit sector (nonprofit sector = acedemia, unions, lawyers, liberal think tanks, nonprofit doogooder organizations like "Teach for America", etc) where the profit sector represents the problem solving private sector and the non-profit sector are those industries which rely on, what Moldbug would call, the New Deal Structure of irresponsible government regulatory agencies for their employment.

The nonprofit sector has a vested interest in maintaining their employment by cooking up bogus and destructive solutions to non-existent problems such as the Global Warming industry, the racial diversity industry, the high-carb low fat diet industry which has created the obesity epidemic and then positions itself to reap the revenue of average American's attempts to lose weight on diets that can't work, etc.

If you wonder why white lawyers keep voting for Democrats who pursue anti-white policies like Affirmative Action, just ask yourself how much money the law industry would have gained from discrimination lawsuits ever since Nixon invented AA decades ago.

August 30, 2011 at 6:24 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

.

August 30, 2011 at 6:24 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

.

August 30, 2011 at 6:25 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

“There are a lot of occupations here that tend to be pretty high-paid that are kind of recession proof,”

The New Deal nonprofit sector THRIVES during recessions (and any other nanny state policy failure whether Global Warming industry, the Palestinian industry, the race industry, the Turn-Afghanistan-Into-Switerland-Industry which employs so many liberal arts majors) that's why DC causes problems - so they can have perpetual think tank employment.

August 30, 2011 at 6:28 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

Here is the nature of the nonprofit New Deal sector: The nonprofit sector (and the related federal New Deal or New Deal-ish bureaucracies or those hooked up those agencies like K-Street lobbying firms) is a feedback loop that can only thrive by strangling the profit sector, e.g., strangle everything and everyone in the US which is productive and solves problems, with Progressive regulations designed either to perpetuate problems that can't be solved or make those problems worse.

It seems Moldbug is right and FDR was the spawn of Satan after all.

Why Washington Really Likes Itself

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/28/sunday-review/why-washington-really-likes-itself.html?_r=1

The latest index report shows that the District of Columbia is far more confident in the economy than any state, by a long shot. In every state, most residents think the economy is getting worse; in the nation’s capital, fully 60 percent think the economy is getting better.

And yet the District of Columbia also has an unemployment rate above the nation’s — 10.8 percent, compared with 9.1 percent — and persistent ills like crime and poverty.

“If ever there were a place where people not only tend not to face economic facts, but it’s almost their purpose not to face economic facts, it’s Washington,” said P. J. O’Rourke, a contributing editor at The Weekly Standard and a political satirist.

What’s going on? How can an economy ravaged by double-digit joblessness be so Pollyannaish?

First, note that Gallup’s economic confidence poll surveyed only those who are employed, and the employed are going to have a sunnier outlook than the unemployed. Yet that positive bias would be true in every state Gallup surveys, and the capital still has a much rosier outlook.

Maybe that’s because Washington is richer, on the whole, than any American state: it has a per-capita income of $71,011, compared with the national average of $40,584, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. And the geysering income streams that support Washingtonians are reliable in good times and bad.

August 30, 2011 at 6:30 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

continued

“There are a lot of occupations here that tend to be pretty high-paid that are kind of recession proof,” said Jared Bernstein, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal research organization in Washington, and a former economic adviser to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

The city’s economy is built not only on government employees, but also on defense contractors, nongovernmental organizations and research institutions that get federal money. Unlike just about any other earnings source, federal funds have continued to flow freely through recession and recovery.

What’s more, the government is moving ahead with major overhauls of financial regulation and health care, and Congress has its sights on taxes and spending, as illustrated by the debt-ceiling battle. All these targets have attracted major industrial stakeholders, injecting billions into the Washington lobbying industry.

“Let’s say you have a whole new department of financial consumer affairs,” Mr. O’Rourke said. “That means a huge growth in the corresponding lobbying industry. If you’re a credit card company and you don’t have a lobbyist there, you’ve got to be suicidal.”

In turn, these factors have helped prop up the housing market, unlike elsewhere in the country where foreclosure rates seem as high as pessimism.

August 30, 2011 at 6:31 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

“There are a lot of occupations here that tend to be pretty high-paid that are kind of recession proof,”

The New Deal nonprofit sector THRIVES during recessions (and any other nanny state policy failure whether Global Warming industry, the Palestinian industry, the race industry, the Turn-Afghanistan-Into-Switerland-Industry which employs so many liberal arts majors) that's why DC causes problems - so they can have perpetual think tank employment.

August 30, 2011 at 6:32 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

From an engineering perspective, the New Deal structure, by which I mean the non-profit sector feedback loop of liberal think tanks, academia, doogooder orgs like Teach for America, lobbying firms, BIGLAW, governmant regulators, federal mega-bureaucracies like the EPA, labor Unions, community organizers, etc is more impressive than the Hard Left revolutionary socialist regimes because the New Deal structure manages to be fully operational without receiving orders from a top->down command and control structure as the USSR did.

The New Deal structure is a masterpiece of evil political engineering.

The Devil was a Whig the whole time, not a Bolshevik.

Impressive and terrible to behold.

August 30, 2011 at 6:40 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

The New Deal structure is more like a Borg Cube (as originally described in the first 3 original STNG episodes dealing with the Borg) than the Death Star because the New Deal's feedback loop system operates as a hive mind where there is no "Borg Queen" or Vader or Emperor giving it orders for it to execute.

August 30, 2011 at 6:44 PM  
Anonymous The Undiscovered Jew said...

The ship is strangely generalized in design. There is no specific bridge or central control area, no specific engineering section-- I can identify no living quarters.

August 30, 2011 at 6:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Speaking of law firms and how they fit into the non-profit sector, has anyone examined who BigLaw's pro bono work benefits / harms politically?

August 31, 2011 at 1:49 AM  
Anonymous josh said...

Does antyone know the name of that website that produces social network graphs of different people and organizations? Thanks.

September 2, 2011 at 8:30 AM  
Anonymous Ron Potato Emergency Services Dept said...

Social Network Graph website:

I found http://nexus.ludios.net/ It is shut down, but still has:
- Links to similar websites
- The source code
- Other useful links

September 2, 2011 at 12:29 PM  
Anonymous josh said...

Thanks. I'm looking for one in particular. I ask here, because somebody linked to it once in the comments, but I can't track it down. I remember you could search for people or organizations, then expand or collapse connections. Does anyone know what I am talking about?

September 2, 2011 at 1:55 PM  
Anonymous TKM said...

Does anyone know what the Mencius post is where he says something like

"Going back onto gold will annoy/irritate a lot of people. You may be surprised just how annoyed/irritated it makes them, but this is a good sign."

September 4, 2011 at 10:04 AM  
Blogger Aaron Davies said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

September 26, 2011 at 6:13 AM  
Blogger Aaron Davies said...

@josh: were you thinking of david horowitz's Discover the Networks?

September 26, 2011 at 8:06 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home